MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Distribution System Reliability: Telecontrol Automatic Reclosing (TAR) for Power Restoration in Distribution Grid

2025· article· W4416342519 on OpenAlexaff
Aomesh Bhatt, Aditi Garg, Prachal Jadeja

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecloserFault (geology)Gridtar (computing)Reliability (semiconductor)Circuit breakerSmart gridPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the implementation of Telecontrol Automatic Reclosing (TAR) on sub-transmission feeder head breakers or reclosers, utilizing Schneider’s Advanced Distribution Management System (ADMS) version 3.7 to automatically close breakers/ reclosers within 60 seconds after a fault trip. TAR is implemented on single or multiple feeders in the grid, and the TAR profile can be customized based on various trigger combinations. The paper introduces FLISR and TAR applications in ADMS 3.7 and demonstrates that TAR can reduce customer duration of power loss and improve key reliability metrics, thereby enhancing the utility’s overall performance. TAR proves particularly advantageous during severe weather events, where multiple feeders may trip simultaneously. In such instances, TAR automates the reenergization process, allowing grid operators to focus on addressing other critical issues rather than manually managing each reclosure. The results underscore TAR’s potential to improve grid resilience, optimize outage management, and provide cost-effective solutions for utilities. By automating fault recovery and minimizing outage durations, TAR offers substantial operational benefits, particularly in mitigating the impacts of widespread disruptions caused by adverse weather conditions. This paper highlights the role of TAR in modernizing fault management systems, making it a valuable tool for utilities seeking to improve service continuity and grid reliability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207